|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: don't know why you girls aren't attracted to me...
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
When are the Mums going to talk to the sons? Raise the sons? Teach the sons? When are the women going to take responsibility for their parenting of abusive men?
When are the Dads?
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
When are the Mums going to talk to the sons? Raise the sons? Teach the sons? When are the women going to take responsibility for their parenting of abusive men?
When are the Dads?
Exactly what I thought.
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
anoesis
Shipmate
# 14189
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
And besides, it's about something bigger than being sad because you're rejected. So, while it's nice that you understand it hurts to be rejected, it's not just about that. It's about things that you can't understand because you're not a man. You don't have to navigate having a male libido. You don't have the conflicting societal expectations around being a gentleman (did anyone else notice that Elliot described himself as "the supreme gentleman"?), the pressure of feeling that you have responsibility but no power, the pressure to restrict and inhibit your emotions because to be honest about them is not seen as 'manly'.
I appreciate that you are debating in good faith, and also being polite with it. I don't actually disagree with anything you have posted above, but can I just note, for record:
1.) No, I don't have to navigate having a male libido. I have to navigate having a female libido. It may, from what I hear, be a less constant force/pressure, but don't assume it is easier to suppress or ignore when its rears its (purely metaphorical) head.
2.) I think the pressure to restrict and/or inhibit emotions and not be honest about what you are feeling cuts across all of society, sadly. I'm sort of bad at it. I do better in a milieu such as this, where, it seems to me, more honesty and openness is tolerated.
--------------------
The history of humanity give one little hope that strength left to its own devices won't be abused. Indeed, it gives one little ground to think that strength would continue to exist if it were not abused. -- Dafyd --
Posts: 993 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
When are the Mums going to talk to the sons? Raise the sons? Teach the sons? When are the women going to take responsibility for their parenting of abusive men?
Somewhere I picked up the impression that some men's hatred of women comes from resentment of their mothers. Some of the mothers have been genuinely abusive while others have done their best in very difficult situations which their sons did not understand. I think a son who has genuine respect for his mother is much less likely to be misogynistic.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by anoesis:
1.) No, I don't have to navigate having a male libido. I have to navigate having a female libido. It may, from what I hear, be a less constant force/pressure, but don't assume it is easier to suppress or ignore when its rears its (purely metaphorical) head.
True. I'm not saying it's easier. Just saying it's different.
quote:
Originally posted by anoesis:
2.) I think the pressure to restrict and/or inhibit emotions and not be honest about what you are feeling cuts across all of society, sadly. I'm sort of bad at it. I do better in a milieu such as this, where, it seems to me, more honesty and openness is tolerated.
Also true, but I think in general women get more opportunities to open up than men do. This probably isn't a difference between men and women in their nature though, but more down to societal expectations and conventions.
I'm thinking here of friends whose child had cancer. The wife frequently had people visiting, asking how she was, what they could do, how she was coping. No-one ever visited the husband to ask him those same questions. That's just the way it is for a lot of men.
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
anoesis
Shipmate
# 14189
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I think a son who has genuine respect for his mother is much less likely to be misogynistic.
Moo
I think you are right about this, and it seems to me that one thing all women can do, and do quite easily, in addition to the much more difficult and not-able-to-be-guaranteed 'live a life your son can respect' bit, is not participate in trash talk of other women. Actually, daughters could learn important things from that one as well.
--------------------
The history of humanity give one little hope that strength left to its own devices won't be abused. Indeed, it gives one little ground to think that strength would continue to exist if it were not abused. -- Dafyd --
Posts: 993 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
saysay
Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Two of the norms are men telling other men to "man up" (see Ariston's post), and women slut-shaming other women for being too forward (see my exchange with ecumaniac, or the Prom dress thread). Both feed into the same idea that men's feelings are dangerous and shouldn't be awakened.
This was the exchange:
quote:
Originally posted by ecumaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
So, who exactly would think a woman asking a man out was "forward" "pushy" "slut" "unfeminine"? Is it actually her own girlfriends?
This is how my friends describe of their workmates, or of people they used to be friends with.
My own friendship group is disproportionately high in people 1. "On the spectrum" and 2. In non traditional relationship structures. So we are big on asking for what you want using words, and not doing things when drunk. But every now and again we are reminded that we are not the norm.
OK, so my experience of slut shaming is that it happens when someone's sexual behavior is different enough from the norm (or what is perceived to be the norm) that it threatens to change people's expectations when it comes to relationships and sex.
I think I might be unusual in that during my high school and college years it was common to call both men and women sluts. I think it was partly the result of a long-running Saturday Night Live sketch. I personally tried to avoid using the word for a long time, but I gave up sometime after enough people had offered me money for sex that I had to ask people who knew me if there was something about me that made me seem like a prostitute (we eventually determined that the men were simply playing the odds).
But I was jokingly told to 'stop slutting around' for activities as innocuous as talking to men, although I'm the kind of person who inadvertently flirts with inanimate objects, so it was often described as flirting, and I was told I shouldn't do it if I wasn't interested in eventually developing some kind of sexual relationship with a man. I don't think anyone I know would have viewed a woman asking a man out as 'pushy,' 'forward,' 'unfeminine', or 'slutty.' That tended to be reserved for people engaging in activities that we wouldn't engage in, or crossing lines that we wouldn't cross.
So, for example, I was regularly called a slut and a whore in high school because two guys I rejected made up a rumor that I had fucked them both at the same time and I regularly let random guys fuck me up the ass. The balance eventually shifted and people started to believe me more than them (after all there were two of them and only one of me), but I have to say that it seemed to make a lot of the other guys I rejected feel like it was some kind of personal attack on them because after all I had sex with basically everybody else who wanted to have sex with me.
More generally, people were called sluts for public displays of affection, for certain types of dancing, and for throwing themselves at guys.*
*by which I mean getting drunk and starting to kiss him without any of the intermediary stages of checking to see if he was interested and, importantly here, available, or if he maybe already had a girlfriend. Who was on the other side of the room watching the whole thing.
It's a way of policing people's behavior and enforcing norms. Because the problem is that when it becomes normal to have sex after the third date, then after the first date, then with some random guy you just met in a bar, people who don't engage in said behavior start being labeled as prudes, uptight, sex-hating, etc. Unless you explicitly talk about it, someone who is used to people having sex after the third/first/no date will tend to read your refusal as a lack of interest.
On the one hand, it's none of my business if you have a fabulous time going home and having fantabulous sex with someone you just met. I don't have fantabulous sex outside of long-term relationships (we have to get to know each other and each other's bodies and sexual responses), and I have to worry about getting pregnant (and since I would not have an abortion, that means I have to worry about whether the two of us might be able to raise a child together). But I have one friend whose sexual behavior really bothers me because people are always mixing the two of us up (they'll remember that she was the one who said or did something and vice versa). And we're similar enough in some ways that people are always assuming that we're similar in other ways. And her sexual behavior crosses so many lines that I am simply not willing to cross; I'm constantly having to remind people that I am not her and the fact that she likes/dislikes something or wants/doesn't want something does not mean that I think/feel/am the same way. And it's made worse by the fact that she lies about me and whether or not I agree with her about certain things (like abortion, or whether or not women should shave all their public hair off, and a million other things). She has been known to create drinking game rules that involve either grabbing your own breast or grabbing the breast of the person sitting next to you (not going to happen). And this has been going on since high school.
Which is all probably getting a bit rant-y. But while I still try not to use the word slut, there are valid reasons for pointing out and wanting to point out that another woman's sexual behavior is causing you problems. Sometimes it's like pointing out that someone is being a selfish asshole and it's hurting other people - something best done among trusted friends and family.
But it's not particularly about the fact that a man's feelings are dangerous and shouldn't be awakened (although it may be a little bit more about being afraid of awakening men's feelings without knowing how capable he is of handling them or how he might cope with sexual frustration or rejection). Similarly, I would say that "man up" is not about telling a man not to have feelings but to deal with them in an appropriate way.
And, yes, that includes not letting a woman know if your reaction to sexual rejection is anger.
--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."
Posts: 2943 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
But if your definition of an attack includes being grabbed by a man and kissed or groped against your will, your chance of being attacked are not slim at all. In fact, I suspect that most women have been attacked in this way. The first time it happened to me, I was not at a bar, or a nightclub, or on a date. I had not been drinking. I was not provocatively dressed. I was a 14-year-old tourist out seeing the sights in a crowded public area in broad daylight. I don't think my experience was unique. I don't even think it was particularly unusual.
Well, by the age of 14 I already had survived about half a dozen serious fights, including two cases of being beaten up by gangs of more than six considerably older boys. The threat or experience of physical violence from other males was pretty common from about twelve till about my mid twenties I would say, and has since faded mostly because I neither hang out where volatile men gather in large numbers any longer (e.g., clubs and bars on the weekend) nor now wear clothes and other markers of a specific "tribe" (like punks, waves, skins, goths, ...). At least at one time in my life, I think I was in clear danger of serious injury and was saved basically by a big bus driver physically defending the entry to his bus against a gang rushing after us. I may have experienced above average violence from other boys and men in my life, but I'm far from the extreme end. Certainly I know guys who got hit harder, and I doubt that there are many men who have not been harassed and attacked physically at some point in their life.
I don't want to diminish female suffering here, which clearly has its own dimension due to the sexual component. But as far as male physical violence is concerned, it needs to be said that you are simply appearing on the radar of that violence due to your sexual development. It is not uniquely targeted at you. Rather, it has been rampant all around you and you simply become a target of it when you become sexually desirable. It is also true that once you have become a target, you are an easier target than most men. But while I have no stats for that, I'm betting that while attacks on you will be more frequent, they will be on average less intense. It's a question of upping the ante by the victim. And most attacks on men at adult level that I have experienced or know about involved groups and/or weapons.
None of this will help the most unlucky individuals, be it a woman lying their raped, or a man lying there with stab wounds to the chest. But you are simply missing out on a lot of potential male allies if you exclusively focus on what male violence does to women only. Men grow up with male violence at least as much as women do. Really. Yes, not under the aspect of sexual violence and I appreciate the special emotional significance of that. But watch your male friends closely the next time some group of men close by grows loud and restless. Or look at your man as you stroll in the dark and two people close in. Look at his body posture change when he realises it is a couple, a man and a woman, and not two men drawing close. Men are in a somewhat different position to most women, since they have the option to pose for "maybe you can hurt me, but I will hurt you, too" effect. But this hardly means that they stride the world confidently as masters of the universe, no matter what.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
so much to respond to; so much work to get done. Forgive me for drive-by posting, I'll hopefully address some more of this later.
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
And I think it's especially important for boys to hear that kind of message from men.
YESYESYES!
to Pyxe's post, and strictly personally - as a single mother of two boys I TRY my hardest to have these conversations with my sons. I probably put more effort into it than I did with my daughter, because of exactly what anoesis said above - it's hard enough to be the parent of a victim, but I don't know if I could survive being the parent of a perpetrator. It is my duty to humanity to challenge what they bring home from their peers, the objectifying, the the demands, the sense of sex being owed. and make no damned mistake, in the media and on the playground, that's what the little shits are feeding each other.
and YES those conversations are a stone cold bitch. "MOM! I can't believe you're talking about this! ohmygod you're so embarrassing! How could you think I'd ever do something like that? don't you even trust me?!?"*
And seriously, the victim conversation has to happen with your boys, too. and the perpetrator conversation with your girls. I have two male friends who have been raped. by women. it's horrific and agonizing because they don't feel they have social or legal recourse. and the results of their efforts prove that. (want to see a man slut-shamed? tell a group of people he's been raped by a women. it makes me physically ill what people say)
But back to what Josephine says here - I can say everything I can to my sons until I'm blue in the face, but it holds damn near zero water compared to what they would take away from a man saying it.
My boys essentially have no father. I mean, he exists, and they occasionally interact with him, but he's a cross between a buddy and santa claus. So I really rely on the other men in my life to be the good examples. I have to. anything to do with being male I have zero authority on, and they'll believe their peers before me. but if one of my male friends says something to them, it's pure gold.
so, men - please please fortheloveofgod be a good role model and talk to boys about this stuff. your sons, grandsons, students, nephews, friends' kids, that random kid down the block. you can make such a difference just by being a stand-up guy.
Boys are desperate for guidance, especially when puberty hits and they feel they're suddenly locked in the same body with a one-eyed pervert looking to betray them.
Don't worry about being awkward. it is awkward. have the goddamn conversation anyway. they'll hate you today but hear you tomorrow.
*full transcript available upon request, as we've done this so many times I have it memorized.
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
it seemed to make a lot of the other guys I rejected feel like it was some kind of personal attack on them because after all I had sex with basically everybody else who wanted to have sex with me.
a joke I will often tell when called a slut by a man:
What's the different between a slut and a bitch?
A slut will have sex with everyone. A bitch will have sex with everyone except you.
I, sir, am a bitch.
(I've found it helpful, anyway)
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
And it's made worse by the fact that she lies about me and whether or not I agree with her about certain things (like abortion, or whether or not women should shave all their public hair off, and a million other things). She has been known to create drinking game rules that involve either grabbing your own breast or grabbing the breast of the person sitting next to you (not going to happen). And this has been going on since high school.
Why is this person your friend?
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
saysay
Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Why is this person your friend?
She's not anymore.
She was one person in a group of friends who were very important to me for a long time; she's best friends with the wife of someone who I care a lot about. For a long time, that group of friends was important enough to me that I was willing to try to deal with her shit.
<shrug>
--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."
Posts: 2943 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
anoesis
Shipmate
# 14189
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
I don't want to diminish female suffering here, which clearly has its own dimension due to the sexual component. But as far as male physical violence is concerned, ... it has been rampant all around you and you simply become a target of it when you become sexually desirable.
I could be misreading you here, but it looks a bit like you might be suggesting a causal link between sexual desire and sexual violence. The appalling regularity with which eighty and ninety-year old women are raped in home invasions, and the phenomenon of male-on-male rape by otherwise heterosexual men kind of gives the lie to this. I don't think sexual violence has to do with desiring the victim, so much as desiring to shame the victim. Which is probably what a lot of other violence is about, too, but maybe not so much the gang and street-fighting you have discussed. I would have said that was more about the perpetrators, their status, their territory, etc., which is why it's often conducted in front of an audience.
--------------------
The history of humanity give one little hope that strength left to its own devices won't be abused. Indeed, it gives one little ground to think that strength would continue to exist if it were not abused. -- Dafyd --
Posts: 993 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
But if your definition of an attack includes being grabbed by a man and kissed or groped against your will, your chance of being attacked are not slim at all. In fact, I suspect that most women have been attacked in this way. The first time it happened to me, I was not at a bar, or a nightclub, or on a date. I had not been drinking. I was not provocatively dressed. I was a 14-year-old tourist out seeing the sights in a crowded public area in broad daylight. I don't think my experience was unique. I don't even think it was particularly unusual.
Well, by the age of 14 I already had survived about half a dozen serious fights, including two cases of being beaten up by gangs of more than six considerably older boys. The threat or experience of physical violence from other males was pretty common from about twelve till about my mid twenties I would say, and has since faded mostly because I neither hang out where volatile men gather in large numbers any longer (e.g., clubs and bars on the weekend) nor now wear clothes and other markers of a specific "tribe" (like punks, waves, skins, goths, ...). At least at one time in my life, I think I was in clear danger of serious injury and was saved basically by a big bus driver physically defending the entry to his bus against a gang rushing after us. I may have experienced above average violence from other boys and men in my life, but I'm far from the extreme end. Certainly I know guys who got hit harder, and I doubt that there are many men who have not been harassed and attacked physically at some point in their life.
I don't want to diminish female suffering here, which clearly has its own dimension due to the sexual component. But as far as male physical violence is concerned, it needs to be said that you are simply appearing on the radar of that violence due to your sexual development. It is not uniquely targeted at you. Rather, it has been rampant all around you and you simply become a target of it when you become sexually desirable. It is also true that once you have become a target, you are an easier target than most men. But while I have no stats for that, I'm betting that while attacks on you will be more frequent, they will be on average less intense. It's a question of upping the ante by the victim. And most attacks on men at adult level that I have experienced or know about involved groups and/or weapons.
None of this will help the most unlucky individuals, be it a woman lying their raped, or a man lying there with stab wounds to the chest. But you are simply missing out on a lot of potential male allies if you exclusively focus on what male violence does to women only. Men grow up with male violence at least as much as women do. Really. Yes, not under the aspect of sexual violence and I appreciate the special emotional significance of that. But watch your male friends closely the next time some group of men close by grows loud and restless. Or look at your man as you stroll in the dark and two people close in. Look at his body posture change when he realises it is a couple, a man and a woman, and not two men drawing close. Men are in a somewhat different position to most women, since they have the option to pose for "maybe you can hurt me, but I will hurt you, too" effect. But this hardly means that they stride the world confidently as masters of the universe, no matter what.
Boy, this is good.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
art dunce
Shipmate
# 9258
|
Posted
Funny after mentioning Firefly earlier I happened to have this episode cued for tonight.
Jubal Early: You ever been raped?
[Kaylee looks at him in shock]
Kaylee: The captain is right down that hallway he can hear you...
Jubal Early: The captain's locked in his quarters. They all are. There's nobody can help you. Say it.
[she begins to cry]
Kaylee: There's - there's nobody can help me.
Jubal Early: I'm gonna tie you up now. And you know what I'm gonna do then?
[shakes her head]
Jubal Early: I'm gonna give you a present. Get rid of a problem you've got. And I won't touch you in any wrong fashion, nor hurt you at all, unless you make some kind of ruckus. You throw a monkey wrench into my dealings in any way, your body is forfeit. Ain't nothing but a body to me. And I can find all unseemly manner of use for it.
He knocks out Mal. He then hits Book. But he threatens to violate and rape Kaylee. Your body is forfeit,
It is NOT the same.
--------------------
Ego is not your amigo.
Posts: 1283 | From: in the studio | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
saysay
Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645
|
Posted
No, it's not the same. "If you still know how, talk to me now."
Judas Iscariot.
--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."
Posts: 2943 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
I don't want to diminish female suffering here, which clearly has its own dimension due to the sexual component. But as far as male physical violence is concerned, it needs to be said that you are simply appearing on the radar of that violence due to your sexual development. It is not uniquely targeted at you. Rather, it has been rampant all around you and you simply become a target of it when you become sexually desirable. It is also true that once you have become a target, you are an easier target than most men. But while I have no stats for that, I'm betting that while attacks on you will be more frequent, they will be on average less intense. It's a question of upping the ante by the victim. And most attacks on men at adult level that I have experienced or know about involved groups and/or weapons.
You missed an important difference between men's experience and women's experience of male physical violence. Straight men don't have to figure out if the people they might be interested in dating might mete out some portion of that violence.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by anoesis:
I could be misreading you here, but it looks a bit like you might be suggesting a causal link between sexual desire and sexual violence. The appalling regularity with which eighty and ninety-year old women are raped in home invasions, and the phenomenon of male-on-male rape by otherwise heterosexual men kind of gives the lie to this. I don't think sexual violence has to do with desiring the victim, so much as desiring to shame the victim.
I do not believe in monocausal explanations there, but I think it would be tilting at windmills to discuss that here. My point was anyhow not about why precisely men are violent to women in a sexual manner. Rather it was to point out that men are physically violent first, in particular also to other men, and that this violence extends to women in a sexual manner. And the point of saying that was that if you are looking for allies among men, then maybe reminding them whom and what they fear is a better tactic. Because asking for help against an enemy tends to works a lot better if one points out that it is a shared enemy.
quote:
Originally posted by anoesis:
Which is probably what a lot of other violence is about, too, but maybe not so much the gang and street-fighting you have discussed. I would have said that was more about the perpetrators, their status, their territory, etc., which is why it's often conducted in front of an audience.
And how are such power games fundamentally different from what you believe rape to be, namely a power game? I do agree by the way that there are differences, but if you think that rape is all about power and little about sex, then that makes rape a lot closer to much of the violence that men direct at other men.
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
You missed an important difference between men's experience and women's experience of male physical violence. Straight men don't have to figure out if the people they might be interested in dating might mete out some portion of that violence.
I would consider that to be part of the "sexual dimension". It is indeed a problem I don't have much as a man. However, if I hang out with other men - and that is what you mostly do as a boy/man at least until most people "couple up" - then I do have to worry about getting drawn into fights because of them (because of who they are, where they go with me, and what they do there). Indeed, there is a non-zero chance that they may turn on me, if I don't know them well. I have to admit that this sort of thing is mostly in my past now, but in particular in my late teens it was a major issue. My sleepy little home town once had to call in a hundred riot police to separate an ongoing war between youth groups... And if I was engaging in more "high risk behaviour", like say visibly supporting a particular football club, then it would be still an issue now. But yeah, having reached middle age has meant that things are pretty quiet now among my peers. Maybe that is also the case for women, maybe not - you tell me.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
Ingo, I really appreciate you sharing your thoughts and experiences. The whole dimension of men fearing physical violence from other men was something I had thought about in the context of this discussion. However, I am one of the lucky ones - although I have at times feared being attacked, I have somehow always managed to avoid it, so I don't have the same experiences to talk about that you do.
I do think that RuthW's observation is pertinent. While I think that it's true that, like assault, rape is primarily a violent crime, not a sexual crime, rape is on a whole 'nother scale compared to assault. ISTM that it's the psychological element - the violation and humiliation - that do the real damage. Don't get me wrong, both are horrendous - the psychological difficulties in coping with the experience of both are very real. And I've experienced neither, so who am I to talk?... But, yeah, for me, the fear of being raped seems a lot greater than the fear of being beaten up. And being beaten up (or the fear of it) doesn't have the same huge effect that rape (or the fear of it) does, when it comes to forming romantic relationships.
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Yes, I think that rape is much worse than being beaten up, as it is a violation of the self. I share IngoB's experiences to an extent, i.e. street fights, being beaten up, on one occasion with a starting handle, and also, being grabbed by the cops, and invited into their van, for what they termed a couple of rounds, very scary. Also stabbed by a woman, but that's another tale. But I imagine that these things are just nowhere near as traumatizing as rape, and I have worked with rape victims.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
Sheesh. I'm feeling very lucky that the worst I ever got was a few aches and bruises in scraps at school.
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
I'm so dismayed by the terrible sexual violence of men. I feel a strong sense of corporate shame, just for being a man. The cases of gang rape in India are physically sickening to me. I actually get quite severe nausea. And yet... And yet...
I do feel attracted to women and I realise with some horror that I do objectivise them sexually, especially when they wear certain clothes and makeup and behave in an attractive kind of way. It's a very disturbing thing to realise that I, myself, am a potential part of the problems suffered by women, just because I'm a man- about which I have no choice.
Isn't the core problem here that men are hardwired in a particular way that makes them want the terrible power advantage over women so that they can use them as objects to bring forth their ejaculation? Is it not an indelible part of their essential make up? Shouldn't ALL of us recognise this, and stop separating men into normal guys and psychopaths?
I intend to teach my sons that women are NEVER to be objectified, however they find they make them feel, and that they must be truly regarded and treated as three-dimensional persons. Because, not despite, how attractive they are. And I think that's MY job as their father. Nobody else on the planet can do that, especially not their mother.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pyx_e
Quixotic Tilter
# 57
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
When are the Mums going to talk to the sons? Raise the sons? Teach the sons? When are the women going to take responsibility for their parenting of abusive men?
When are the Dads?
Exactly what I thought.
There are many well thought out and discussed lines of thought in this thread. I am not suggesting mine trumps any of them. Just another line, though it is in my opinion a vital one.
My premise is that people (mostly men) who grow up to be violent toward women often have an Attachment Disorder.
I also fully recognise that the mother does not have to be the primary caregiver. On the other hand by a huge majority she is.
As part of my life I frequently spend time with children with Attachment Disorders. They are so lost, angry and afraid. Many of the boys have very real problems relating to women which you can see will blight their lives, the lives of their wives, partners and girlfriends. The lives of their children, thereby creating more offspring born into the same situation. Many of the girls have such a skewed understanding of love and affection you can see the path ahead of them leading to, again, a reiteration of the situation.
On the other hand I know many young people who have grown up in appalling circumstances but have come from a loving family and most importantly knew from day 1 they were loved and cherished. These kids just shine.
Usual caveats apply: you can find instances of the above which suggest the opposite.
However, my question still applies (and I hope I have explained a little more of my thinking). I am suggesting that babies who are not subjected to withdrawal of affection and care and who are not neglected have a bedrock of decency that future parenting can easily build on. Whereas children with an attachment disorder spend most of their lives afraid. That fear either goes inward into depression and despair or outward into violence and anger.
Again we can argue the rights and wrongs of who is the primary care giver male/female/both. But the reality is that it is predominantly mothers and to be frank in my experience it is neglect by mothers in the early months and years that creates the deeper issues in later life. Fathers only add spin to the bullshit.
Later appropriate parenting is very important, but what happens (or not) during the early months is vital, literally.
In addition to IngoB's point I would add that I have been beaten and abused to the point of being hospitalised and none of it matters or draws close to in comparison to emotional violence.
Fly Safe,
Pyx_e
--------------------
It is better to be Kind than right.
Posts: 9778 | From: The Dark Tower | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
anoesis
Shipmate
# 14189
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
quote:
Originally posted by anoesis:
Which is probably what a lot of other violence is about, too, but maybe not so much the gang and street-fighting you have discussed. I would have said that was more about the perpetrators, their status, their territory, etc., which is why it's often conducted in front of an audience.
And how are such power games fundamentally different from what you believe rape to be, namely a power game? I do agree by the way that there are differences, but if you think that rape is all about power and little about sex, then that makes rape a lot closer to much of the violence that men direct at other men.
Perhaps I explained it poorly. When I said that I felt that gang and street-fighting related violence was about the perpetrators, rather than the victims, what I was envisaging was the sort of scenario where some poor schmuck (yes, a guy), gets knocked down and kicked about on the pavement by six or so thugs, with the leader going 'What you lookin' at then? Why you lookin' at me? What's your problem?', etc. Now, my reading of this situation, having only ever been a bystander, is that the guy getting kicked about hasn't done anything wrong at all, including but not limited to looking at someone funny - he's just a scapegoat. Who he is is incidental. It's not really him who's being taught a lesson. It's the bystanders, who see that these are people you really shouldn't mess with, who are being taught a lesson. Which they internalise by averting their eyes and walking on by. I guess my contention that sexual violence is qualitatively different from this, even though I think it's primarily about violence rather than sex, is that the 'lesson' is aimed at the victim of the violence.
--------------------
The history of humanity give one little hope that strength left to its own devices won't be abused. Indeed, it gives one little ground to think that strength would continue to exist if it were not abused. -- Dafyd --
Posts: 993 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Pyx_e
Good points about very early poor care. But the mother who is bad at this, was probably poorly taken care of herself, and so on. You end up with a kind of infinite chain of emotional abuse; so I suppose people talk also of the alienation, atomization, etc., produced in society. Quite a political mine-field.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Isn't the core problem here that men are hardwired in a particular way that makes them want the terrible power advantage over women so that they can use them as objects to bring forth their ejaculation? Is it not an indelible part of their essential make up? Shouldn't ALL of us recognise this, and stop separating men into normal guys and psychopaths?
Or is it the complete opposite? I find myself wanting to say to the lovely men who have posted on this thread:
"I do not think this is some kind of spectrum, with sexually "successful" (whatever that could mean) men at one end, Elliott at the other, and you in the middle, but nearer to Elliott's end than to a young Mick Jagger.
This isn't something that could have happened to you. Men who go on killing sprees are not just a more extreme version of men who get hacked off sometimes at the fact that, say, the woman they would like to be with stays with a man who cheats on her."
And that desire of yours, Yorick, to play with power in the context of consensual sex, is not part of a continuum that leads to rape. The rape scene from Firefly quoted above (I think by Art Dunce) - I could work that script up into a very gratifying sexual fantasy, provided the protagonist was the man I love, who I know absolutely would never do anything without my consent. I would be turned on thinking he was turned on by it. None of this has anything at all to do with the reality of rape and violence.
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
anoesis
Shipmate
# 14189
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
The rape scene from Firefly quoted above (I think by Art Dunce) - I could work that script up into a very gratifying sexual fantasy, provided the protagonist was the man I love, who I know absolutely would never do anything without my consent. I would be turned on thinking he was turned on by it. None of this has anything at all to do with the reality of rape and violence.
Interesting. I found that really, fully, shudder-worthy. In fact I had to leave the computer and go and do something else for a while. And I have not been raped. I guess it just goes to show we're all individuals.
But yes, this discussion has provided me with tremendous insight into men's experience of both sexuality and societal pressures, and, latterly, violence, and it is good that all this gets talked about.
While I don't think there is any need for men to feel the heaviness of corporate guilt because some of their number are truly awful individuals, probably an attitude of 'If I am not part of the solution, I am part of the problem' is not a bad one to have. As has been said a few times, this is hardly a new problem, and it is to a great extent cyclical. Well, there are various points in the cycle at which one might intervene. Some of these will fall mostly to women, as Pyx_e suggests. Some, such as calling bullshit on already adult males who display inappropriate attitudes and behaviours, should fall to other men. For my part, I'd be really happy to just see this happening. It doesn't require any apologising for having testicles on the part of those so arrayed.
--------------------
The history of humanity give one little hope that strength left to its own devices won't be abused. Indeed, it gives one little ground to think that strength would continue to exist if it were not abused. -- Dafyd --
Posts: 993 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Great Gumby
Ship's Brain Surgeon
# 10989
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
What I actually originally brought up when I started posting on this thread was the idea that Elliot Roger felt powerless:
I think this is an important point. I've been thinking in another context about how people become radicalised - how they turn from someone who's quite nice, decent chap, maybe a bit odd, into someone who will start shooting people, blowing things up, flying planes into buildings, and so on. The one thing that I noticed very clearly is the sense that there is no other option. The causes and their validity are different, but at its heart they're all about powerlessness, or at least a massive power imbalance, relating to something they consider important. Our survival instinct is strong, but it can be overruled by a strong enough need to get that power we lack.
NB: I'm not saying that he should be given power to demand sex, or that he was anything but ridiculously privileged. Just that if he saw things in those terms, we need to acknowledge that. Sexual relationships were evidently something that mattered hugely to him, to the point of obsession and to the exclusion of all else, but he saw no possible way of becoming fulfilled in that direction.
--------------------
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool. - Richard Feynman
A letter to my son about death
Posts: 5382 | From: Home for shot clergy spouses | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by anoesis: It doesn't require any apologising for having testicles on the part of those so arrayed.
Myeah, I dunno. That seems a bit like saying guns don't kill, people do. As I said, having testicles is indeed the problem, I fear, and I think all men should take greater responsibility for that rather than seeing themselves as being essentially different from the Elliott Rogers of the world. No doubt, his parents didn't view him as the threat he was, and if they had, maybe some people wouldn't be so dead today.
I think men do need to feel corporate guilt.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
quote:
Originally posted by anoesis: It doesn't require any apologising for having testicles on the part of those so arrayed.
Myeah, I dunno. That seems a bit like saying guns don't kill, people do. As I said, having testicles is indeed the problem, I fear, and I think all men should take greater responsibility for that rather than seeing themselves as being essentially different from the Elliott Rogers of the world. No doubt, his parents didn't view him as the threat he was, and if they had, maybe some people wouldn't be so dead today.
I think men do need to feel corporate guilt.
I'm not sure that corporate guilt will do much good. A corporate awareness, on the lines of "Hold on: this feeling I get is just what drives some men to rape and sexual assault" may be a very useful step in preventing violent crimes against, for the most part, women.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Great Gumby:
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
What I actually originally brought up when I started posting on this thread was the idea that Elliot Roger felt powerless:
I think this is an important point. I've been thinking in another context about how people become radicalised - how they turn from someone who's quite nice, decent chap, maybe a bit odd, into someone who will start shooting people, blowing things up, flying planes into buildings, and so on. The one thing that I noticed very clearly is the sense that there is no other option. The causes and their validity are different, but at its heart they're all about powerlessness, or at least a massive power imbalance, relating to something they consider important. Our survival instinct is strong, but it can be overruled by a strong enough need to get that power we lack.
NB: I'm not saying that he should be given power to demand sex, or that he was anything but ridiculously privileged. Just that if he saw things in those terms, we need to acknowledge that. Sexual relationships were evidently something that mattered hugely to him, to the point of obsession and to the exclusion of all else, but he saw no possible way of becoming fulfilled in that direction.
Yes, I think you're right. One of the problems that I see with some men today, is that they feel inadequate and powerless. This can be very dangerous, as they can start to compensate.
It strikes me about Rodger for example, that he couldn't speak. Well, he could speak quite fluently, but he could not speak to his feelings of inadequacy. Instead, he became this pumped-up Superman, but very hollow.
Well, I've worked with violent men, and one way in, is to find the vulnerability and inadequacy, which of course, they are very loath to show.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Pyx_e, mothers are undoubtedly important to children of both sexes.
But when it comes to teaching sons, there is always going to be a certain point where mothers can model expectations but it is fathers and other male role models that will be modelling behaviour.
It's inevitable because we all model ourselves on those we identify with. That includes fans of a band imitating the band, kids who like Harry Potter running around with sticks and shouting 'Expelliamus!' (I've no idea if I've spelled that right), and small male humans imitating large male humans once they have a concept of maleness.
Any mother attempting to tell her son how to behave is going to face a comeback (either express or thought in the son's head) that a father isn't: "Mum, you don't know what it's like to be a guy". In fact there are parts of this thread that make that very point. We've got women explaining in various tones that men don't automatically understand the female experience, and men explaining in various tones the same thing to women.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pyx_e
Quixotic Tilter
# 57
|
Posted
quote:
I think men do need to feel corporate guilt.
Nope.
I know what I am capable of. I have tried all my adult life to be part of the solution. I have struggled against violence to women (and men). I have struggled with violent men (and women). I have asked for help with my own shit, I have asked to be told when I am screwing up, I have stepped back and stepped away. I have committed bringing up my kids and helping other kids.
It just too weak to lump all men (women, sexualities, races, socio-economic groups or whatever) into one. I can not affect all men, I can hardly affect this one. I will not feel collective guilt. I will know my own shame.
P
--------------------
It is better to be Kind than right.
Posts: 9778 | From: The Dark Tower | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
No doubt, his parents didn't view him as the threat he was, and if they had, maybe some people wouldn't be so dead today.
Yorick, this is demonstrably false. The one thing we know about his parents is that they were trying to raise the alarm a week before any of this happened. They DID see him as a threat.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
I do think that RuthW's observation is pertinent. While I think that it's true that, like assault, rape is primarily a violent crime, not a sexual crime, rape is on a whole 'nother scale compared to assault. ISTM that it's the psychological element - the violation and humiliation - that do the real damage. Don't get me wrong, both are horrendous - the psychological difficulties in coping with the experience of both are very real. And I've experienced neither, so who am I to talk?... But, yeah, for me, the fear of being raped seems a lot greater than the fear of being beaten up. And being beaten up (or the fear of it) doesn't have the same huge effect that rape (or the fear of it) does, when it comes to forming romantic relationships.
First, I have said myself that there is a different dimension to rape, and I said so prior to RuthW's comment. Second, getting beat up can be rather violating and humiliating indeed, with long term psychological consequences. Third, I think a male concept of what rape means psychologically is actually skewed by a male concept of how sex is supposed to go. To be honest, I have no idea how to write this without offending people. But here goes... As a heterosexual man, my visceral idea about my role in sex is that I will be doing the penetrating. Being penetrated instead is then not simply a violation of my body in a sexual manner, it is basically putting in question my sexual role. Another man is, essentially, forcing me into the role of being his woman. When men think about rape and react strongly, they invariably think about being forced into a passive homosexual role by another man. But actually, the sex-aligned equivalent of a man raping a woman would of course be a woman raping a man. And yes, that can be done given the limited control most men have over their genitals if stimulated. Now, most men would indeed prefer being beaten up severely and humiliated by a gang of men over being raped by another man. But whether they would prefer the former over being raped by a woman is a rather different question. I'm not sure personally, because I know what it means to be beaten up, and the threat of sexual violence against me by a woman is remote, with all my sexual experiences being on the pleasurable side. I do think the situation for women is different again, given for example the whole issue of potentially being impregnated by a rape. I'm not saying that a woman raping a man is a true equivalent either. But men should be aware that "how I would feel if a man raped me" is mixing in a lot more than just the sexual violation as such.
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
In addition to IngoB's point I would add that I have been beaten and abused to the point of being hospitalised and none of it matters or draws close to in comparison to emotional violence.
Well, yes. The worst I've ever been hurt in my life was by an ex-girlfriend, and there was not a hint of physical violence in that. But at times like these bringing up emotional violence seems like attempting a cop-out or horrible score keeping. There is a time and a season even for truth, and some truths can wait while one deals with other truths IMHO.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I'm not sure that corporate guilt will do much good. A corporate awareness, on the lines of "Hold on: this feeling I get is just what drives some men to rape and sexual assault" may be a very useful step in preventing violent crimes against, for the most part, women.
The single biggest killer of UK men 20-49 (and the second biggest of boys 5-19) is suicide.
So, given that men contribute to the majority of violent assaults, sexual assaults, murders and suicides, and also that many men simply don't exhibit violent or self-destructive behaviour, can any useful generalisations be made regarding our feelings?
I'm floundering a bit here, so apologise. Are men who are able to talk about how they feel to others (and not meet ridicule) less likely to develop what, for the want of a better word, becomes a pathology? Sometimes, I just think we're programmed to destroy, and at other times, that we can do anything. I've never been a particularly open person, and I think that's common for most men (I tend to put most of my feels in my books, and that only happened after I'd turned adult). I still haven't found the courage to talk to my brother about our father's terminal cancer.
Is it that all men are the problem, that only some men are the problem, or is it that too many men are the problem?
[ 30. May 2014, 11:49: Message edited by: Doc Tor ]
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
No doubt, his parents didn't view him as the threat he was, and if they had, maybe some people wouldn't be so dead today.
Yorick, this is demonstrably false. The one thing we know about his parents is that they were trying to raise the alarm a week before any of this happened. They DID see him as a threat.
Too little, too late. My point (in reply to Pyxe's post about mums) is how especially fathers can and should influence their young sons not to objectify women sexually, and that the first step here is to recognise that natural and inevitable testicle-bound tendency (to objectivise women) in ourselves. I don't see how mothers are in as good a position to do this, given that they are women.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by anoesis:
The appalling regularity with which eighty and ninety-year old women are raped in home invasions....
This certainly happens, but judging by what I read in the newspapers, it is rare, at least in this part of the world. Moreover, this type of assault creates far more public outrage than does assault on a younger woman.
Earlier in this thread I said that some men hate women because of their early relationship with their mothers. I suspect that men who rape elderly women fall into this category.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
It's just too weak to lump all men ... into one.
Weak? What do you mean? You surely cannot contest that most sexual violence is committed by men against women.
You do realise I'm talking about tendencies and generalities here, right?
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
the point of saying that was that if you are looking for allies among men, then maybe reminding them whom and what they fear is a better tactic. Because asking for help against an enemy tends to works a lot better if one points out that it is a shared enemy.
The TED Talk featured here makes that point as well.
And that may well be a difficult point to embrace, especially when fear and pain and the memory of the same begin to affect how you hear what other people are saying, and how you think about their words.
quote:
Originally posted by The Great Gumby:
I think this is an important point. I've been thinking in another context about how people become radicalised - how they turn from someone who's quite nice, decent chap, maybe a bit odd, into someone who will start shooting people, blowing things up, flying planes into buildings, and so on. The one thing that I noticed very clearly is the sense that there is no other option. The causes and their validity are different, but at its heart they're all about powerlessness, or at least a massive power imbalance, relating to something they consider important.
The sense of powerlessness may be important -- lots of talk on these puahate sorts of groups about being "incel" -- but the sense of being celebrated and cheered on by like-minded men seems to be an important factor as well.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
I think what Pyx_e's saying is that your "I think men do need to feel corporate guilt" is off the mark. I shouldn't have to feel guilty for what someone else does. A lot of men have enough guilt and self-loathing based on their own actions. Adding to that shame and responsibility for what someone else has done (and therefore have had no control over) is futile and ultimately prohibitive to progression.
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
having testicles is indeed the problem, I fear, and I think all men should take greater responsibility for that rather than seeing themselves as being essentially different from the Elliott Rogers of the world.
I can only take responsibility for my own testicles. In terms of how I, and other men are different (and similar) to Elliot Rogers, there's been a lot of discussion around that already.
(x-post, reply to Yorick)
[ 30. May 2014, 13:20: Message edited by: goperryrevs ]
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
It's just too weak to lump all men ... into one.
Weak? What do you mean? You surely cannot contest that most sexual violence is committed by men against women.
You do realise I'm talking about tendencies and generalities here, right?
See my post above. That most sexual violence is committed by men against women is incontrovertible. But is it "men", "some men", "most men", "men who think X", "men who've experienced Y", or what? Given that not all men, or even most men, don't commit sexual violence, is it that they're better at controlling the urges we all have, or is that those that do, have urges the rest of us don't?
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
I can only take responsibility for my own testicles.
I am a father of sons, and I have a responsibility for theirs.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Given that not all men [double neg fixed] commit sexual violence, is it that they're better at controlling the urges we all have, or is that those that do, have urges the rest of us don't?
Both, I'd guess. But what I'm sure of is that I should recognise and understand the tendency in myself to objectivise women sexually, recognise it in my sons, and try to influence myself and them in ways that lead to our controlling the urges that we all have because we have testicles. The urges that we don't tend to recognise and understand.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
But what I'm sure of is that I should recognise and understand the tendency in myself to objectivise women sexually, recognise it in my sons, and try to influence myself and them in ways that lead to our controlling the urges that we all have because we have testicles. The urges that we don't tend to recognise and understand.
That's true, and fair point about responsibility for your sons. And in terms of influence, that can spread a lot further.
It doesn't follow, though, that you should feel guilt, shame and responsibility for the actions of rapists and murderers across the world, just because, like you, they have testicles.
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
[XP]
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
I shouldn't have to feel guilty for what someone else does. A lot of men have enough guilt and self-loathing based on their own actions. Adding to that shame and responsibility for what someone else has done (and therefore have had no control over) is futile and ultimately prohibitive to progression.
Perhaps. Maybe guilt is an obstructive term here, but personally, I feel ashamed about all kinds of stuff that isn't my fault- racism, sexism, all sorts of isms actually- but with which I associate myself because I belong to the groups that tend to exhibit those isms. That is, when white people hate blacks I feel ashamed that I am in that group, when homophobes hate gays I feel ashamed on behalf of those idiots, etc.
The group of people who gang-rape and hang Indian girls is male, and there is a causal correspondence there. I'm male, so I'm in that group, and I think this recognition and understanding is directly helpful in improving the gang-raped and murdered Indian girls type of problem.
[ 30. May 2014, 13:40: Message edited by: Yorick ]
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
It doesn't follow, though, that you should feel guilt, shame and responsibility for the actions of rapists and murderers across the world, just because, like you, they have testicles.
Well, of course. I appreciate that on an individual personal level. I know that I'm not a rapist and murderer, even though I have testicles, and that most men aren't either. What I'm getting at here is the value to womankind of all people with testicles appreciating that they are in the GROUP that rapes and murders them, and that it is our testicles that group us. All other grouping effects notwithstanding.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
On the other hand, guilt can actually block awareness in some people. So recommending that any group should feel corporate guilt could back-fire; better to recommend greater awareness, I would say.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
Sure. SioniSais suggested above that 'awareness' is a better term, and I'm good with that. But whatever, guilt works for me, and so does shame.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pyx_e
Quixotic Tilter
# 57
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Pyx_e, mothers are undoubtedly important to children of both sexes.
But when it comes to teaching sons, there is always going to be a certain point where mothers can model expectations but it is fathers and other male role models that will be modelling behaviour.
It's inevitable because we all model ourselves on those we identify with. That includes fans of a band imitating the band, kids who like Harry Potter running around with sticks and shouting 'Expelliamus!' (I've no idea if I've spelled that right), and small male humans imitating large male humans once they have a concept of maleness.
Any mother attempting to tell her son how to behave is going to face a comeback (either express or thought in the son's head) that a father isn't: "Mum, you don't know what it's like to be a guy". In fact there are parts of this thread that make that very point. We've got women explaining in various tones that men don't automatically understand the female experience, and men explaining in various tones the same thing to women.
I completely agree with you. My point is about emphasis. My emphasis is that inappropriate nurturing in early weeks and months causes a disproportionate amount of "damage" later. I absolutely agree that boys need good role models, I would go further and suggest that only males can provide "boundaried" areas for boys to explore and define adult boundaries for the darker sides of their nature.
Yorick, I meant "weak" as in the argument is weak. Sorry if you read it any other way. It was not meant as a personal slight. I consider any argument that consigns a whole section of society with one label, emotion, thought or spirituality to be ultimately unhelpful. I might be like that, we are all not like that.
Lastly and just for the fun of it...... the only thing that has been able to help me with my struggles in this area is a Christian community which is open, prayerful, calls to account and supports. I can not do this on my own. I need you & Him.
Pyx_e
[ 30. May 2014, 14:10: Message edited by: Pyx_e ]
--------------------
It is better to be Kind than right.
Posts: 9778 | From: The Dark Tower | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
